1. Ken's abrasiveness
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
>
> ken mortenson wrote:
> >
> > Version 5 may turn out to be a gutting of version 4.
To understand this comment you must understand it only applies in a world
I wished I lived in. This is not the real world and I have no expectation
it will happen. Euphoria was a glimmer of hope for me. Hope fades.
One man wrote Euphoria. My expectation is that a committee seldom has as
clear a vision. I'm sorry if this sounds so negative. If fact, I am a
hopeful person (overly, it often turns out.)
> Ken,
>
> You speak to others as though the are immature and as though you have been
> enlightened by the programming gods.
Actually, I'm only half god on my fathers side. 
Ok, maybe humor isn't an
appropriate response. Everybody (I am included in the set of everybody) is
more or less immature. Maturity is far off in the distance with regard to
humanity. That's a declarative statement with no support offered. I do that.
A lot. It's abrasive. I don't want to offend. Maturity on my part would
suggest I hold my tongue more often (no matter if I am right or wrong.)
Probably my enthusiasm for being part of a social group is a bit too much.
Now the other side of the coin. Am I enlightened. I would hope so, aren't you?
If the lightbulbs never went off we'd all still be stratching cave paintings
(which would be sad for me since I really have no artistic ability whatsoever.)
I state my opinions in a direct manner. I do not hold myself above others.
Let me repeat that because it seems to get lost somehow...
I. DO. NOT. HOLD. MY. SELF. ABOVE. OTHERS.
Yes, I may give the impression. Let's say I do give that impression.
The impression is not the reality.
> There are many very intelligent people here on EUforum
You believe I don't appreciate that??? Then I'm sorry. Because it is my
appreciation which is at issue I can categorically assert this to be false.
> who have vast amounts of professional programming experience who have
> studied language design who have programmed millions of lines of code
> and finally who are not dumb.
Again. Why do you think I don't know this? I assume the answer is in my
speech patterns. There is room for give and take on both our parts.
> The way you speak is condescending and irritating to many people.
I can only plead that it is not meant to be so. But I understand the
perception.
> You have said such things as:
>
> "but the rewards (this is just one of many voices of experience) are
> more than you know."
I stand by this statement. People that have not experienced GOTOLESS
programming (and it may take years) lack the appreciation for the experience.
I've never done drugs. I know some who have. When they tell me I lack
appreciation for the experience I am forced to agree.
If I tell you that you lack an experience which you do in fact lack. You can
say I'm being derogatory (which is an immature response) or you can accept
the observation as a simple observation. I've never been able to water ski.
Should I feel I am less than people that can? Should you or anybody else?
If anyone feels picked on when there is ABSOLUTELY NO INTENT to do so, then
perhaps my response should be... BOO FREAKIN HOO. Because frankly there is
a part of me that says, this isn't entirely my issue.
>
> "With all due respect, this is incorrect."
You're right. I should have left the due respect part off, because obviously
it was dismissed by those that read it. Do you appreciate that 'this is
incorrect' is an opinion? Am I not entitled?
> "Back in the day, I thought I could never live without ON X GOTO, as well as
> ON X GOSUB. I have matured quite a bit since then."
I would hope that after thirty years in a profession everybody could assert
this last assertion. I certainly wouldn't hold it against you if you made
the assertion about yourself.
> "This isn't the only problem related to GOTO's but it is perhaps the easiest
> to perceive."
Some people imagine that GOTOs are not a problem because they use them and
are comfortable with them. Not to pick on Kat, but my comment about
equivalent code is an example of how easy it is to perceive the problem.
Granted her focus was on labeling, but I can't help but notice that eleven
out of twelve code groups could never be reached. Perhaps I'm an ass for
pointing that out. This is what makes it easier to perceive than other
equally damaging issues.
>
> "A programmer after my own heart (soon you will achieve oneness...)"
This is humor that obviously fell flat.
> "I am but a simple and humble servant to whatever is true."
You have no idea (be offended if you like because I'm so wound up at this
point that I no longer care) but I really do feel that striving for truth
is a noble goal. I wish we all could hold such a goal dear.
> So, I am not complaining, rebuking or upset, I am merely letting you know that
> your style of speaking is not helping your cause.
I'll take you at your word. In this case, I am certain that you are right.
I hope you will wish me to overcome those aspects of my (lack of)
communication skills that prompt your comments.
> In addition to this, please
> when making a statement provide information to back it up. I do not wish to
> go back and pick out more quotes, but statements such as "that's ugly", "it's
> bad practice", "..." says who? Can you give examples? Can you prove your
> point?
> An opinion is not worth much in today's world. Please provide real content.
A good observation. I do have a habit of stating unsubstantiated opinion.
I do have support for what I say, but I am not so organized and my memory
often fails me.
For example you may note that I made a post which concedes that Euphoria
can be coded in a finely granular modular way. My experience is that
without a development environment that is supportive it, it fails as
practical matter. This is an important issue for me, because I want a
productivity tool and I'm tired of the limitations VB imposes on me.
I'm going to take a break from posting. I have hopes that I expect will
never be realized. If I had the skill, I would write the compiler I
envision. Sadly, I know that I don't possess this skill at this time.
Please, don't miss the fact that I have a high regard for the people on this
forum.
Is enlightenment so rare that none of us are allowed glimpses of it?
I'm going to leave it at that. I'm not sure I've said what I need to say,
but language is such an imperfect thing anyway. I only hate evil people.
I've met evil. None of you fit into that category.
Warm regards, ken.
2. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
- Posted by Matt Lewis <matthewwalkerlewis at g?ail.c?m>
May 28, 2008
-
Last edited May 29, 2008
ken mortenson wrote:
>
> For example you may note that I made a post which concedes that Euphoria
> can be coded in a finely granular modular way. My experience is that
> without a development environment that is supportive it, it fails as
> practical matter. This is an important issue for me, because I want a
> productivity tool and I'm tired of the limitations VB imposes on me.
I'd make a similar note about VB. It's certainly possible to code in a
modular fashion, but most of the VB code I've encountered is far worse in
this aspect than the euphoria code I've encountered.
I'm sure some of the tension that some have noted is based on the fact that
you only recently started participating in the community, which I tend to
think of as a pretty tight knit group that's generally really good at
welcoming newcomers, but not so much when what are probably questions about
how euphoria works come across as criticism, both of the language and of
the participants (regardless of the intent).
In part, it's difficult to imagine someone having such strong opinions about
how the language functions when he clearly has very little experience with
it. Granted, having lots of outside experience can help those opinions,
but your remarks still seemed to show a fair amount of ignorance with
respect to euphoria. I'd challenge you to find a forum that does a better
job at integrating new members, but it usually takes some work on the
part of the new members, too.
Matt
3. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
- Posted by Kat <KAT12 at co?sahs.ne?>
May 28, 2008
-
Last edited May 29, 2008
Matt Lewis wrote:
>
> ken mortenson wrote:
> >
> > For example you may note that I made a post which concedes that Euphoria
> > can be coded in a finely granular modular way. My experience is that
> > without a development environment that is supportive it, it fails as
> > practical matter. This is an important issue for me, because I want a
> > productivity tool and I'm tired of the limitations VB imposes on me.
>
> I'd make a similar note about VB. It's certainly possible to code in a
> modular fashion, but most of the VB code I've encountered is far worse in
> this aspect than the euphoria code I've encountered.
>
> I'm sure some of the tension that some have noted is based on the fact that
> you only recently started participating in the community, which I tend to
> think of as a pretty tight knit group that's generally really good at
> welcoming newcomers, but not so much when what are probably questions about
> how euphoria works come across as criticism, both of the language and of
> the participants (regardless of the intent).
>
> In part, it's difficult to imagine someone having such strong opinions about
> how the language functions when he clearly has very little experience with
> it. Granted, having lots of outside experience can help those opinions,
> but your remarks still seemed to show a fair amount of ignorance with
> respect to euphoria. I'd challenge you to find a forum that does a better
> job at integrating new members, but it usually takes some work on the
> part of the new members, too.
Yea, you can't just stroll in here, spend 10 years coding in Euphoria, and ask
for things to change! Don't expect you'll get nested routines like you asked for
the first month you were here, or goto, or case/switch, or 64bit integers, or
8bit string types, or multiple inheritance in classes, or eval() / string
execution, or "reverse" name resolution, or the latest OS's 64bit function calls,
or a real debugger that can edit the variable's values, or anything else. If they
ever do arrive, they'll be because someone else thought of them. And with only 10
years experience in using Eu, expect your code to be called carp, even if it's
being used and was the only *working* code of it's type when you wrote it! And
can't just say things you think are obvious, you *must* justify to the most
excruciating details all facts anyone can think of to ask about, to back up your
statements, over and over and over again, for years, and to do so will make you
an irritant, troublemaker,, you won't be tenacious, you'll be stubborn. So
welcome to Euphoria, Ken! Put on a manic clown face like CK's (not that he is a
manic clown, i did not say that) so you'll be well liked, and be prepared to wait
forever for requested features. Yes, Euphoria is better than most languages, but
it still has holes in it. Just sit back and take what you are given, don't rock
the boat.
Kat
4. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
- Posted by c.k.lester <euphoric at ckle?ter.c?m>
May 28, 2008
-
Last edited May 29, 2008
Kat wrote:
>
> ...expect your code to be called carp
That's fishy.
> Put on a manic clown face like CK's (not that he
> is a manic clown, i did not say that) so you'll be well liked...
I don't know whether to be insulted or what.
> Yes, Euphoria is better than most languages,
> but it still has holes in it. Just sit back and take what you are given, don't
> rock the boat.
Yes, sit back and wait for version 8.0! It's going to knock your sock off!!!
5. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
- Posted by Matt Lewis <matthewwalkerlewis at gmail.c??>
May 28, 2008
-
Last edited May 29, 2008
Kat, I respect you, and I rarely raise to answer rants like this, but here
goes...
Kat wrote:
>
> Yea, you can't just stroll in here, spend 10 years coding in Euphoria, and
> ask for things to change! Don't expect you'll get nested routines like you
> asked for the first month you were here, or goto, or case/switch, or 64bit
> integers, or 8bit string types, or multiple inheritance in classes, or
> eval() / string execution, or "reverse" name resolution, or the latest
> OS's 64bit function calls, or a real debugger that can edit the variable's
> values, or anything else. If they ever do arrive, they'll be because
> someone else thought of them.
It hasn't been that long since euphoria's been open source. There still
aren't many people who understand how to change things, especially in the
back end. Some of these things aren't trivial, maybe aren't even possible
without a full rewrite. I think everyone could cite an example of where
their favorite feature has been rejected by the community.
> And with only 10 years experience in using Eu, expect your code to be
> called carp, even if it's being used and was the only *working* code of
> it's type when you wrote it!
I think this is simply part of releasing anything, and communicating with
people on the internet. I'm not a big penny arcade fan, but they got this
one absolutely right:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19/
> And can't just say things you think are obvious, you *must* justify to the
> most excruciating details all facts anyone can think of to ask about, to
> back up your statements, over and over and over again, for years, and to
> do so will make you an irritant, troublemaker, you won't be tenacious,
> you'll be stubborn.
Hey, we're programmers, which means we're a bunch of pedantic detail freaks
with strong opinions about everything. It turns out that most of the folks
around here disagree with you on that particular issue.
> So welcome to Euphoria, Ken! Put on a manic clown face like CK's (not that
> he is a manic clown, i did not say that) so you'll be well liked, and be
> prepared to wait forever for requested features. Yes, Euphoria is better
> than most languages, but it still has holes in it. Just sit back and take
> what you are given, don't rock the boat.
The problem is we can't even agree on which are holes, or how big they are.
Matt
6. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
- Posted by Kat <KAT12 at co?s?hs.net>
May 28, 2008
-
Last edited May 29, 2008
Matt Lewis wrote:
>
>
> Kat, I respect you, and I rarely raise to answer rants like this, but here
> goes...
>
> Kat wrote:
> >
> > Yea, you can't just stroll in here, spend 10 years coding in Euphoria, and
> > ask for things to change! Don't expect you'll get nested routines like you
> > asked for the first month you were here, or goto, or case/switch, or 64bit
> > integers, or 8bit string types, or multiple inheritance in classes, or
> > eval() / string execution, or "reverse" name resolution, or the latest
> > OS's 64bit function calls, or a real debugger that can edit the variable's
> > values, or anything else. If they ever do arrive, they'll be because
> > someone else thought of them.
>
> It hasn't been that long since euphoria's been open source. There still
> aren't many people who understand how to change things, especially in the
> back end. Some of these things aren't trivial, maybe aren't even possible
> without a full rewrite. I think everyone could cite an example of where
> their favorite feature has been rejected by the community.
I feel like *all* of my suggestions were rejected over the years. Even from the
start, with string types, nesting procedures, and a debugger that can change the
var's values. And of course, goto. And string execution. and sheesh, the brick
wall i ran into with strings at all, right down to "why would you want to parse a
string?, you don't want Euphoria for that!, go back to mirc and pascal!". Just
comparing Eu to the most used capabilities of Mirc and Turbo Pascal would show
features Eu could use to be more versatile!
<snip>
> Hey, we're programmers, which means we're a bunch of pedantic detail freaks
> with strong opinions about everything. It turns out that most of the folks
> around here disagree with you on that particular issue.
Which particular issue?, because i see obstacles (humans) in front of *every*
issue. Even me making eunet http functions threadsafe! I know someone will do it,
and maybe they will even lift the code i did eubot with, just like i was going to
do, but it's not acceptable for ME to do it, so i quit working on it. So i won't
be releasing the next strtok.e either, let CK do it the "true euphorian" way.
> > So welcome to Euphoria, Ken! Put on a manic clown face like CK's (not that
> > he is a manic clown, i did not say that) so you'll be well liked, and be
> > prepared to wait forever for requested features. Yes, Euphoria is better
> > than most languages, but it still has holes in it. Just sit back and take
> > what you are given, don't rock the boat.
>
> The problem is we can't even agree on which are holes, or how big they are.
Oh come on! One look at the offshoots of Eu over the years should demo the huge
holes Eu has, starting with OOEU, then Bach, way back to the stuff David Cuny
did, all those preprocessors and parsers, etc.. RDS said they'd be happy if
someone did a debugger in a gui way, so you did one, and it wasn't jumped on!
IIRC, someone did a gui debugger in another programming language once too. It's
extremely disappointing. Instead of "yes, you can do that in Eu", you get "i
wonder if that can be done in Eu." Other languages are starting up with some form
of unicode built in, but despite being asked for in Eu, it's a debate as to if
it's worthwhile?? How arrogantly american to tell all the rest of the world to
7bit ascii-zise their languages or get lost!
I figure this is my last rant, i am tired of wasting my breath and time.
Kat
7. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Matt Lewis wrote:
> your remarks still seemed to show a fair amount of ignorance
I only hope that you will be kind enough to point out my ignorance when
it is on display (rather than claiming me ignorant without evidence that
I might then have the opportunity to refute.)
I'm afraid I can't reciprocate, because that would be abrasive. So I won't
mention the 3 points of ignorance you displayed in this post.
8. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
ken mortenson wrote:
>
> Matt Lewis wrote:
> > your remarks still seemed to show a fair amount of ignorance
>
> I only hope that you will be kind enough to point out my ignorance when
> it is on display (rather than claiming me ignorant without evidence that
> I might then have the opportunity to refute.)
First, I'd like to commend you on that edit, where you left out the last
part: "with respect to euphoria."
Please note that I'm not trying to be pejorative when I say ignorance. Just
pointing out that by your comments, my impression is that of someone not
overly familiar with the language. I'd also say that this is the right
place to get answers to any questions you might have.
Looking at your recent posting history:
>> rid_dbOpen has a value of 2, which seems a little odd to me unless
>> part of some vector table, but I don't know the internals of Euphoria.
>> Namespaces can be used to hide globals of included files if I understand the
>> discussion I've read so far in the other threads.
This next example is really identical to a for statement:
for Index = 7 to -14.2 by -1.2
-- ...
end for
>> I wouldn't be adverse to an optional from/by
>> Loop from 7 by -1.2
>> if (Index<-14.2) exit
>> End Loop
Most code I've encountered follow this rule:
>> Most functions and variables should not be public and their scope should
>> be limited to the file they are declared in.
> I'm afraid I can't reciprocate, because that would be abrasive. So I won't
> mention the 3 points of ignorance you displayed in this post.
Guess I'll be left in bliss, then. :)
Matt
9. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Matt Lewis wrote:
> Looking at your recent posting history:
>
> >> rid_dbOpen has a value of 2, which seems a little odd to me unless
> >> part of some vector table, but I don't know the internals of Euphoria.
Turns out the 2 was from a vector table only in the PowerBASIC DLL. Heck of
a good intuition for someone so ignorant.
> >> Namespaces can be used to hide globals of included files if I understand
> >> the
> >> discussion I've read so far in the other threads.
>
> This next example is really identical to a for statement:
> }}}
<eucode>
> for Index = 7 to -14.2 by -1.2
> -- ...
> end for
> </eucode>
{{{
> >> I wouldn't be adverse to an optional from/by
> >> Loop from 7 by -1.2
> >> if (Index<-14.2) exit
> >> End Loop
I was discussing an alternate sytax. You are displaying your ignorance
here by missing that point. You are also displaying an ignorance of my
knowledge in that I uploaded a DOS Euphoria program over two years ago
and have since written several WINDOWS Euphoria programs. If you think
I'm ignorant of the Euphoria for loop syntax that is another point of
your ignorance on display.
Finally, it is cowardly of you to claim me ignorant in any respect without
providing evidence as I've done in the passage above so that I am at a
severe handicap to defend myself.
You can believe anything you like about me.
I believe that you are no gentleman and a coward.
10. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
ken mortenson wrote:
>
> Matt Lewis wrote:
>
> > Looking at your recent posting history:
> >
> > >> rid_dbOpen has a value of 2, which seems a little odd to me unless
> > >> part of some vector table, but I don't know the internals of Euphoria.
>
> Turns out the 2 was from a vector table only in the PowerBASIC DLL. Heck
> of a good intuition for someone so ignorant.
???
Unless we're looking at different things, here was how you got a value for
rid_dbOpen:
atom rid_dbOpen
rid_dbOpen = define_c_func(dbSQL, "dbOpen", {C_POINTER}, C_LONG)
The 2 was returned by define_c_func, which has no knowledge of a vector
table in the PowerBASIC DLL. Your intuition was coincidence.
> > >> Namespaces can be used to hide globals of included files if I understand
> > >> the
> > >> discussion I've read so far in the other threads.
> >
> > This next example is really identical to a for statement:
> > }}}
<eucode>
> > for Index = 7 to -14.2 by -1.2
> > -- ...
> > end for
> > </eucode>
{{{
> > >> I wouldn't be adverse to an optional from/by
> > >> Loop from 7 by -1.2
> > >> if (Index<-14.2) exit
> > >> End Loop
>
> I was discussing an alternate sytax. You are displaying your ignorance
> here by missing that point. You are also displaying an ignorance of my
> knowledge in that I uploaded a DOS Euphoria program over two years ago
> and have since written several WINDOWS Euphoria programs. If you think
> I'm ignorant of the Euphoria for loop syntax that is another point of
> your ignorance on display.
Well, then I guess this was another example of poor communication. You
suggested something (that was the entire message, BTW) that was already
present in the language. This also coming from the person arguing for
parsimonious languages, I connected the dots that you weren't aware of
the full for-loop syntax.
One irony of your loop philosophy, is that originally, Euphoria didn't have
for-loops, because a while loop could do anything a for loop could do.
You're right, I didn't look through the submissions archive, just the
EuForum archive.
> Finally, it is cowardly of you to claim me ignorant in any respect without
> providing evidence as I've done in the passage above so that I am at a
> severe handicap to defend myself.
Why is it cowardly? In the case above, with define_c_func, you proved your
ignorance of how that feature of the language works. According to the docs,
which I believe someone responded to your original post with a link:
"A small integer, i1, known as a routine id, will be returned."
This isn't a sin or a faux pas or anything--just a fact. According to
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn, ignorance is defined as:
"the lack of knowledge or education"
You're certainly not the most lacking in knowledge about the language
who participates on this forum, though you make a lot of [admittedly]
very assertive claims, both about what euphoria is and isn't, and about
general programming. You'll note I didn't say anything about you being
ignorant about programming in general.
It's interesting [to me] that you construed all of this as a personal
attack, especially after making such a big deal about your lack of social
graces. To wit:
> You can believe anything you like about me.
>
> I believe that you are no gentleman and a coward.
And you are welcome to believe whatever you like. I'm done feeding the
trolls.
Matt
11. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Kat wrote:
>
> Matt Lewis wrote:
> >
> >
> > Kat, I respect you, and I rarely raise to answer rants like this, but here
> > goes...
> >
> > Kat wrote:
> > >
> > > Yea, you can't just stroll in here, spend 10 years coding in Euphoria, and
> > > ask for things to change! Don't expect you'll get nested routines like you
> > > asked for the first month you were here, or goto, or case/switch, or 64bit
> > > integers, or 8bit string types, or multiple inheritance in classes, or
> > > eval() / string execution, or "reverse" name resolution, or the latest
> > > OS's 64bit function calls, or a real debugger that can edit the variable's
> > > values, or anything else. If they ever do arrive, they'll be because
> > > someone else thought of them.
> >
> > It hasn't been that long since euphoria's been open source. There still
> > aren't many people who understand how to change things, especially in the
> > back end. Some of these things aren't trivial, maybe aren't even possible
> > without a full rewrite. I think everyone could cite an example of where
> > their favorite feature has been rejected by the community.
>
> I feel like *all* of my suggestions were rejected over the years. Even from
> the start, with string types, nesting procedures, and a debugger that can
> change
> the var's values. And of course, goto. And string execution. and sheesh, the
> brick wall i ran into with strings at all, right down to "why would you want
> to parse a string?, you don't want Euphoria for that!, go back to mirc and
> pascal!".
> Just comparing Eu to the most used capabilities of Mirc and Turbo Pascal would
> show features Eu could use to be more versatile!
>
> <snip>
>
> > Hey, we're programmers, which means we're a bunch of pedantic detail freaks
> > with strong opinions about everything. It turns out that most of the folks
> > around here disagree with you on that particular issue.
>
> Which particular issue?, because i see obstacles (humans) in front of *every*
> issue. Even me making eunet http functions threadsafe! I know someone will do
> it, and maybe they will even lift the code i did eubot with, just like i was
> going to do, but it's not acceptable for ME to do it, so i quit working on it.
> So i won't be releasing the next strtok.e either, let CK do it the "true
> euphorian"
> way.
>
> > > So welcome to Euphoria, Ken! Put on a manic clown face like CK's (not that
> > > he is a manic clown, i did not say that) so you'll be well liked, and be
> > > prepared to wait forever for requested features. Yes, Euphoria is better
> > > than most languages, but it still has holes in it. Just sit back and take
> > > what you are given, don't rock the boat.
> >
> > The problem is we can't even agree on which are holes, or how big they are.
>
> Oh come on! One look at the offshoots of Eu over the years should demo the
> huge
> holes Eu has, starting with OOEU, then Bach, way back to the stuff David Cuny
> did, all those preprocessors and parsers, etc.. RDS said they'd be happy if
> someone did a debugger in a gui way, so you did one, and it wasn't jumped on!
> IIRC, someone did a gui debugger in another programming language once too.
> It's
> extremely disappointing. Instead of "yes, you can do that in Eu", you get "i
> wonder if that can be done in Eu." Other languages are starting up with some
> form of unicode built in, but despite being asked for in Eu, it's a debate as
> to if it's worthwhile?? How arrogantly american to tell all the rest of the
> world to 7bit ascii-zise their languages or get lost!
>
> I figure this is my last rant, i am tired of wasting my breath and time.
>
> Kat
While I have been here for 6 years only I think, watched quite a few rants and
requests from you (and agreeing with I'd say 60% of them) being consistently
rejected, and definitively shared this frustrating experience of banging head
against a wall of inertia, minimalism and sometimes sheer ignorance, I can tell
you that it is not hopeless.
If I started Æ a few years ago, and left it to dust later, it was because I was
appalled by the rejection of features that are (soon were) so conspicuously
missing. I can tell you that, last automn, I was about to leave this forum for
good, as I was not developing anything in Eu any longer.
Then there has been the hasty release of win32lib 70.1, where I had put some
work; I had to take care. And now that some prominent conservatives don't appear
to be around anymore, we have this upheaval leading to 4.0 taking place, and
parts of that wretched Æ code is now being merged (by me) into 4.0.
So... while I certainly understand the irritation (a stronger term could be more
appropriate, I bet), because I have felt it for so long, the fact is that drastic
changes are taking place. Perhaps are we mutating from a dandy language to a
certainly elegant, but far more practical, language.
While there is opposition (but not as fierce as it once was) to goto, and while
I'm afraid a native (wchar[] like) string type would be possible only with a
massive rewrite of the interpreter, other areas are probably much mor open than
they have ever been. I think an improved debugger or string execution are part of
them.
Whether those could make it in 4.0 alpha, 4.0 stable or 4.1 is a timetable
issue. I dare to say practicality is starting to win over modern art in shaping
Eu design. As far as I'm concerned, I keep on pushing.
CChris
12. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
CChris wrote:
> While I have been here for 6 years only I think, watched quite a few rants and
> requests from you (and agreeing with I'd say 60% of them) being consistently
> rejected, and definitively shared this frustrating experience of banging head
> against a wall of inertia, minimalism and sometimes sheer ignorance, I can
> tell
> you that it is not hopeless.
>
> If I started Æ a few years ago, and left it to dust later, it was because I
> was appalled by the rejection of features that are (soon were) so
> conspicuously
> missing. I can tell you that, last automn, I was about to leave this forum for
> good, as I was not developing anything in Eu any longer.
>
> Then there has been the hasty release of win32lib 70.1, where I had put some
> work; I had to take care. And now that some prominent conservatives don't
> appear
> to be around anymore, we have this upheaval leading to 4.0 taking place, and
> parts of that wretched Æ code is now being merged (by me) into 4.0.
>
> So... while I certainly understand the irritation (a stronger term could be
> more appropriate, I bet), because I have felt it for so long, the fact is that
> drastic changes are taking place. Perhaps are we mutating from a dandy
> language
> to a certainly elegant, but far more practical, language.
>
> While there is opposition (but not as fierce as it once was) to goto, and
> while
> I'm afraid a native (wchar[] like) string type would be possible only with a
> massive rewrite of the interpreter, other areas are probably much mor open
> than
> they have ever been. I think an improved debugger or string execution are part
> of them.
>
> Whether those could make it in 4.0 alpha, 4.0 stable or 4.1 is a timetable
> issue.
> I dare to say practicality is starting to win over modern art in shaping Eu
> design. As far as I'm concerned, I keep on pushing.
>
> CChris
And some of us will continuously fight against the inclusion of misfeatures, as
we see them, and the pollution of the language, until we tire of arguing and
leave this place too.
Once Euphoria loses its beauty, looks like every other language out there, and
there is no longer anything worthwhile to distinguish it from anything else.
I know that I was close to that point yesterday, and I'm sure that I'll be
pushed to that brink again and again with all of these proposals that come up.
--
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple
system that works.
--John Gall's 15th law of Systemantics.
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
13. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Jason Gade wrote:
>
> And some of us will continuously fight against the inclusion of misfeatures,
> as we see them, and the pollution of the language, until we tire of arguing
> and leave this place too.
Jason, I'm somewhat in the minimalist camp, with a caveat: if an added feature
is not going to negatively impact the performance of the interpreter, I
generally don't have a problem with its inclusion. For instance, I'm totally
against GOTO being added to the language, but if it doesn't negatively
affect the performance (read: speed) of the interpreter, then I'm not going
to put up a big fight about it.
I wonder, too, about bloating the interpreter... but with today's hardware,
that's not really an issue.
So, while I share your concerns for Euphoria, I don't think we're at a point
where we are seeing its assimilation into the programmer collective. It's
still unique and fast and useful.
14. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Jason Gade wrote:
> >
> > And some of us will continuously fight against the inclusion of misfeatures,
> > as we see them, and the pollution of the language, until we tire of arguing
> > and leave this place too.
>
> Jason, I'm somewhat in the minimalist camp, with a caveat: if an added feature
> is not going to negatively impact the performance of the interpreter, I
> generally don't have a problem with its inclusion. For instance, I'm totally
> against GOTO being added to the language, but if it doesn't negatively
> affect the performance (read: speed) of the interpreter, then I'm not going
> to put up a big fight about it.
>
> I wonder, too, about bloating the interpreter... but with today's hardware,
> that's not really an issue.
>
> So, while I share your concerns for Euphoria, I don't think we're at a point
> where we are seeing its assimilation into the programmer collective. It's
> still unique and fast and useful.
It's not like I'm against /every/ feature, I'm trying to make that clear. And
I'm not so much in the "bloating the interpreter" camp or in the "slowing down
the interpreter" camp because these days it just doesn't really matter that much.
Clear code is far more important.
Maybe it's just pie-in-the-sky idealism, but for me it has more to do with the
overall look and feel of the language, which features /should/ be included
because they fit the philosophy of the language and which are just the syntactic
sugar flavor-of-the-week.
I think there should be a compelling reason to add anything --feature or new
built-in-- to the interpreter, and a broad consensus as well. Not just "because
it's cool."
Same rant, different day I guess.
Heh, for true minimalism and performance I guess I can always just stick with C.
But allow me to make a comparison -- in some ways, going from C (a beautiful
language, IMO, missing some features) to C++ (not so beautiful, lots of
little-used features) introduced a lot of power and expressiveness at the expense
of a lot of clunkiness and ugliness. And some missing features remain missing, or
at least non standard. I'd like to avoid that here.
--
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple
system that works.
--John Gall's 15th law of Systemantics.
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
15. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Jason Gade wrote:
<snip>
> I think there should be a compelling reason to add anything --feature or new
> built-in-- to the interpreter, and a broad consensus as well. Not just
> "because
> it's cool."
Jason, CK is adding repeat_str() to Eu, and Eu doesn't have a string type.
Kat
16. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Kat wrote:
> Jason Gade wrote:
> > I think there should be a compelling reason to add anything --feature or new
> > built-in-- to the interpreter, and a broad consensus as well. Not just
> > "because
> > it's cool."
> Jason, CK is adding repeat_str() to Eu, and Eu doesn't have a string type.
No I'm not.
Kat, weren't you leaving?
17. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Kat wrote:
>
> Jason Gade wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > I think there should be a compelling reason to add anything --feature or new
> > built-in-- to the interpreter, and a broad consensus as well. Not just
> > "because
> > it's cool."
>
> Jason, CK is adding repeat_str() to Eu, and Eu doesn't have a string type.
>
Eu does not have a string type, but it certainly has strings. repeat_str()
sounds like a nice function to have in the standard library:
? repeat('A', 2) -- "AA"
? repeat("ABC", 2) -- {"ABC","ABC"}
? repeat_str("ABC", 2) -- "ABCABC"
--
Jeremy Cowgar
http://jeremy.cowgar.com
18. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> Kat wrote:
> > Jason, CK is adding repeat_str() to Eu, and Eu doesn't have a string type.
> Eu does not have a string type, but it certainly has strings. repeat_str()
> sounds
> like a nice function to have in the standard library:
>
> }}}
<eucode>
> ? repeat('A', 2) -- "AA"
> ? repeat("ABC", 2) -- {"ABC","ABC"}
> ? repeat_str("ABC", 2) -- "ABCABC"
> </eucode>
{{{
I had simply asked about this functionality being currently available in
4.0 alpha alpha, then suggested it be added if not. Derek agree it was a
potentially valuable addition. Where she got that I was adding it to Eu-
phoria is beyond me.
19. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
> > Jason Gade wrote:
> > > I think there should be a compelling reason to add anything --feature or
> > > new
> > > built-in-- to the interpreter, and a broad consensus as well. Not just
> > > "because
> > > it's cool."
> > Jason, CK is adding repeat_str() to Eu, and Eu doesn't have a string type.
>
> No I'm not.
>
I was browsing the svn repository and I couldn't find anything...
Sequences do 99.9% the job of strings, and they do better than what passes for a
string in C.
I think their can be improvement, and it has certainly been mentioned with
regards to unicode strings. It's just that I don't think we know how to do it
"the right way".
I certainly don't know how, even though I've thought about it from time to time.
For me, Euphoria has two types -- atom and sequence, and of course object which
encompasses them both (and is therefore not really separate). Integer is just a
special case of atom it is included for performance reasons/special purposes.
String as a special case of sequence would be okay, if needed.
But again, it needs to be designed and integrated somehow.
Now I'm just rambling. Sorry.
--
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple
system that works.
--John Gall's 15th law of Systemantics.
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
20. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
> > Jason Gade wrote:
> > > I think there should be a compelling reason to add anything --feature or
> > > new
> > > built-in-- to the interpreter, and a broad consensus as well. Not just
> > > "because
> > > it's cool."
> > Jason, CK is adding repeat_str() to Eu, and Eu doesn't have a string type.
>
> No I'm not.
>
> Kat, weren't you leaving?
You want me out of anything you know, don't you, CK?
Kat
21. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> > Kat wrote:
> > > Jason, CK is adding repeat_str() to Eu, and Eu doesn't have a string type.
> > Eu does not have a string type, but it certainly has strings. repeat_str()
> > sounds
> > like a nice function to have in the standard library:
> >
> > }}}
<eucode>
> > ? repeat('A', 2) -- "AA"
> > ? repeat("ABC", 2) -- {"ABC","ABC"}
> > ? repeat_str("ABC", 2) -- "ABCABC"
> > </eucode>
{{{
>
> I had simply asked about this functionality being currently available in
> 4.0 alpha alpha, then suggested it be added if not. Derek agree it was a
> potentially valuable addition. Where she got that I was adding it to Eu-
> phoria is beyond me.
[20:21] <euphoric> i put a func in strtok that does this: x =
repeat_str("xyz",3) -- x = "xyzxyzxyz"
Kat
22. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Kat wrote:
> c.k.lester wrote:
> > Kat, weren't you leaving?
> You want me out of anything you know, don't you, CK?
Well, you kinda promised.
Seriously, while I respect your ability to code, I do get tired of hearing
(reading) you whine about how terrible your life is, especially because of
Euphoria. And now you are telling lies about me adding things to Euphoria.
Did you really think I was adding repeat_str() to Euphoria? Because if you
did not, I can't fathom why you'd say something like that.
23. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
> > c.k.lester wrote:
> > > Kat, weren't you leaving?
> > You want me out of anything you know, don't you, CK?
>
> Well, you kinda promised.
I said i probably would not be coding in Eu again. Show me where i promised
anything.
> Seriously, while I respect your ability to code, I do get tired of hearing
> (reading) you whine about how terrible your life is, especially because of
> Euphoria. And now you are telling lies about me adding things to Euphoria.
> Did you really think I was adding repeat_str() to Euphoria? Because if you
> did not, I can't fathom why you'd say something like that.
Ok, lets escalate this: fork you, CK.
Kat
24. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Kat wrote:
> c.k.lester wrote:
> > Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> > > ? repeat_str("ABC", 2) -- "ABCABC"
> > I had simply asked about this functionality being currently available in
> > 4.0 alpha alpha, then suggested it be added if not. Derek agree it was a
> > potentially valuable addition. Where she got that I was adding it to Eu-
> > phoria is beyond me.
> [20:21] <euphoric> i put a func in strtok that does this: x =
> repeat_str("xyz",3)
> -- x = "xyzxyzxyz"
Uh.
strtok_v2-1.e != Euphoria
It's not even a standard lib.
You were reaching. But what was your point?
25. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Kat wrote:
> c.k.lester wrote:
>
> > Seriously, while I respect your ability to code, I do get tired of hearing
> > (reading) you whine about how terrible your life is, especially because of
> > Euphoria. And now you are telling lies about me adding things to Euphoria.
> > Did you really think I was adding repeat_str() to Euphoria? Because if you
> > did not, I can't fathom why you'd say something like that.
>
> Ok, lets escalate this: fork you, CK.
Hey, now! Be nice.
26. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
> > c.k.lester wrote:
> > > Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> > > > ? repeat_str("ABC", 2) -- "ABCABC"
> > > I had simply asked about this functionality being currently available in
> > > 4.0 alpha alpha, then suggested it be added if not. Derek agree it was a
> > > potentially valuable addition. Where she got that I was adding it to Eu-
> > > phoria is beyond me.
> > [20:21] <euphoric> i put a func in strtok that does this: x =
> > repeat_str("xyz",3)
> > -- x = "xyzxyzxyz"
>
> Uh.
>
> strtok_v2-1.e != Euphoria
>
> It's not even a standard lib.
>
> You were reaching. But what was your point?
Does it really even matter what my point was?
Eu doesn't have a string type, there is no string in Eu. They are sequences,
where every 8bit character takes up 32bits. And you are adding a function that
replaces 3 whole lines of code that do the same thing, a trivial thing, while
important stuff doesn't get added.
Kat
27. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Kat wrote:
>
> Ok, lets escalate this: fork you, CK.
DK?
Matt
28. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Kat wrote:
> c.k.lester wrote:
> > You were reaching. But what was your point?
> Does it really even matter what my point was?
Yes, because lying is not socially appropriate. Distorting facts is frowned
upon (unless you're a politician).
> Eu doesn't have a string type, there is no string in Eu. They are sequences,
Okay, so let's call it repeat_seq() I guess.
> where every 8bit character takes up 32bits. And you are adding a function that
> replaces 3 whole lines of code that do the same thing,
Well, using for...end for only replaces 3 lines of while...end while. So
repeat_seq() is in good company.
> a trivial thing, while important stuff doesn't get added.
By "important stuff" you really mean, "stuff Kat wants."
From what I can see, 4.0 is getting a few changes and bug fixes. It's
called progress, and while it might not be at a pace you appreciate,
it's still stepping forward.
29. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
> >
> > Jason Gade wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > I think there should be a compelling reason to add anything --feature or
> > > new
> > > built-in-- to the interpreter, and a broad consensus as well. Not just
> > > "because
> > > it's cool."
> >
> > Jason, CK is adding repeat_str() to Eu, and Eu doesn't have a string type.
> >
>
> Eu does not have a string type, but it certainly has strings. repeat_str()
> sounds
> like a nice function to have in the standard library:
>
> }}}
<eucode>
> ? repeat('A', 2) -- "AA"
> ? repeat("ABC", 2) -- {"ABC","ABC"}
> ? repeat_str("ABC", 2) -- "ABCABC"
> </eucode>
{{{
>
> --
> Jeremy Cowgar
> <a href="http://jeremy.cowgar.com">http://jeremy.cowgar.com</a>
repeat_pattern() will be committed soon. Does the same.
CChris
30. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
> > c.k.lester wrote:
> >
> > > Seriously, while I respect your ability to code, I do get tired of hearing
> > > (reading) you whine about how terrible your life is, especially because of
> > > Euphoria. And now you are telling lies about me adding things to Euphoria.
> > > Did you really think I was adding repeat_str() to Euphoria? Because if you
> > > did not, I can't fathom why you'd say something like that.
> >
> > Ok, lets escalate this: fork you, CK.
>
> Hey, now! Be nice.
You are the one who says a complaint about going to jail for 10 years because a
neighbor's dog doesn't want me to get my snailmail on my own paid-for realestate
is whining. You are the one who says being unemployed for 23 years is whining.
You are the one who says being constantly let down by the lack of progress in
Euphoria is whining. And you say you respect my coding, yet i stopped work on
eunet and strtok because of it being called carp, and the person who called it
carp was welcomed as a Eu developer, reinforcing his credentials and authority
for disparaging my skills.
Kat
31. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
> >
> > Jason Gade wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > I think there should be a compelling reason to add anything --feature or
> > > new
> > > built-in-- to the interpreter, and a broad consensus as well. Not just
> > > "because
> > > it's cool."
> >
> > Jason, CK is adding repeat_str() to Eu, and Eu doesn't have a string type.
> >
>
> Eu does not have a string type, but it certainly has strings.
<snip>
Where is the definition of strings in Eu, a definition that isn't the exact same
as sequences?
Kat
32. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
> > c.k.lester wrote:
> > > You were reaching. But what was your point?
> > Does it really even matter what my point was?
>
> Yes, because lying is not socially appropriate. Distorting facts is frowned
> upon (unless you're a politician).
Yes, it is, so where did i promise to go away like you said?
> > Eu doesn't have a string type, there is no string in Eu. They are sequences,
>
> Okay, so let's call it repeat_seq() I guess.
>
> > where every 8bit character takes up 32bits. And you are adding a function
> > that
> > replaces 3 whole lines of code that do the same thing,
>
> Well, using for...end for only replaces 3 lines of while...end while. So
> repeat_seq() is in good company.
>
> > a trivial thing, while important stuff doesn't get added.
>
> By "important stuff" you really mean, "stuff Kat wants."
No. I mean like unicode, case/switch, strings, a current thread of unicode and
accented chars which is on the list, all the keywords that really mean "goto"
unlabeled places, real debuggers, windoze/wx/etc gui debuggers like ooeu has,
forward/backward referencing, etc etc. So unless you really have a fascination
with my arse that you'd like to detail, would you get off it, CK? Why must you
distort everything like that? Are you a politician?
> From what I can see, 4.0 is getting a few changes and bug fixes. It's
> called progress, and while it might not be at a pace you appreciate,
> it's still stepping forward.
It sure is a step forward. And I can't contribute because my code is carp. And
if i goto jail for simply existing, it would have been my last chance to make any
positive difference at all anywhere. And while you and others use strtok or eunet
or eubot, my code in them is said to be carp and unuseable.
Kat
33. Re: Ken's abrasiveness
- Posted by Derek Parnell <ddparnell at big?ond.com>
May 29, 2008
-
Last edited May 30, 2008
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> Eu does not have a string type, but it certainly has strings. repeat_str()
> sounds
> like a nice function to have in the standard library:
>
> }}}
<eucode>
> ? repeat('A', 2) -- "AA"
> ? repeat("ABC", 2) -- {"ABC","ABC"}
> ? repeat_str("ABC", 2) -- "ABCABC"
> </eucode>
{{{
But the name is wrong. Consider ...
? repeat_str({"ABC","DEF"}, 2) -- {"ABC","DEF","ABC","DEF"}
--
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
Skype name: derek.j.parnell
